10-29-2017, 05:35 PM
THREE-PEAT!
WSoc PAC-12 Champs
10-29-2017, 06:23 PM
That third goal was a thing of absolute beauty--right out of "Bend it like Beckham." Sensational freshman Catarina Macario (originally from Brazil) took a free kick from just outside the penalty box and bent it around the wall and into the upper right corner of the goal. Wow.
That third goal was a thing of absolute beauty--right out of "Bend it like Beckham." Sensational freshman Catarina Macario (originally from Brazil) took a free kick from just outside the penalty box and bent it around the wall and into the upper right corner of the goal. Wow.
10-29-2017, 11:10 PM
Congrats to the team! I've enjoyed their games this year. Tons of offense and impressive defense.
I am mildly disappointed that the #5 team scored a goal on us. Stanford had a great scoreless streak going (more than a month). Off of play shortly after a corner kick, USC got the goal. I'm no expert, but it looked like a couple of our defenders (between the shooter & the goal) were standing around & didn't react when the ball got to the girl that scored. I don't mean that as a complaint because they've all played so well and stopped so many other balls in as dangerous a spot. But it would have been nice to have kept that streak going.
Anyone else pick up their ears at that point when they were talking about Stanford's WSOC goals this year? At that point it was 67-6 (now 69-6), same as the all-time WVB record against Arizona after the immediately preceding televised event. Just a coincidence but it underlines just how good Stanford women's sports (esp. SOC & VB) are.
I'm glad that not all the posts here are about (American) football.
I am mildly disappointed that the #5 team scored a goal on us. Stanford had a great scoreless streak going (more than a month). Off of play shortly after a corner kick, USC got the goal. I'm no expert, but it looked like a couple of our defenders (between the shooter & the goal) were standing around & didn't react when the ball got to the girl that scored. I don't mean that as a complaint because they've all played so well and stopped so many other balls in as dangerous a spot. But it would have been nice to have kept that streak going.
Anyone else pick up their ears at that point when they were talking about Stanford's WSOC goals this year? At that point it was 67-6 (now 69-6), same as the all-time WVB record against Arizona after the immediately preceding televised event. Just a coincidence but it underlines just how good Stanford women's sports (esp. SOC & VB) are.
I'm glad that not all the posts here are about (American) football.
Congrats to the team! I've enjoyed their games this year. Tons of offense and impressive defense.
I am mildly disappointed that the #5 team scored a goal on us. Stanford had a great scoreless streak going (more than a month). Off of play shortly after a corner kick, USC got the goal. I'm no expert, but it looked like a couple of our defenders (between the shooter & the goal) were standing around & didn't react when the ball got to the girl that scored. I don't mean that as a complaint because they've all played so well and stopped so many other balls in as dangerous a spot. But it would have been nice to have kept that streak going.
Anyone else pick up their ears at that point when they were talking about Stanford's WSOC goals this year? At that point it was 67-6 (now 69-6), same as the all-time WVB record against Arizona after the immediately preceding televised event. Just a coincidence but it underlines just how good Stanford women's sports (esp. SOC & VB) are.
I'm glad that not all the posts here are about (American) football.
I am mildly disappointed that the #5 team scored a goal on us. Stanford had a great scoreless streak going (more than a month). Off of play shortly after a corner kick, USC got the goal. I'm no expert, but it looked like a couple of our defenders (between the shooter & the goal) were standing around & didn't react when the ball got to the girl that scored. I don't mean that as a complaint because they've all played so well and stopped so many other balls in as dangerous a spot. But it would have been nice to have kept that streak going.
Anyone else pick up their ears at that point when they were talking about Stanford's WSOC goals this year? At that point it was 67-6 (now 69-6), same as the all-time WVB record against Arizona after the immediately preceding televised event. Just a coincidence but it underlines just how good Stanford women's sports (esp. SOC & VB) are.
I'm glad that not all the posts here are about (American) football.
10-29-2017, 11:17 PM
Fortunately they'll learn from the corner kick. They relaxed when the ball was headed away, instead of moving up field and keeping close to their marks. Probably won't happen again like that. Better now than in the NCAA tournament!
The team is terrific, and all but one field player will be returning next year! (we're only losing some player named Andi something, how hard could that be to overcome???).     (just kidding)
The team is terrific, and all but one field player will be returning next year! (we're only losing some player named Andi something, how hard could that be to overcome???).     (just kidding)
Fortunately they'll learn from the corner kick. They relaxed when the ball was headed away, instead of moving up field and keeping close to their marks. Probably won't happen again like that. Better now than in the NCAA tournament!
The team is terrific, and all but one field player will be returning next year! (we're only losing some player named Andi something, how hard could that be to overcome???).     (just kidding)
The team is terrific, and all but one field player will be returning next year! (we're only losing some player named Andi something, how hard could that be to overcome???).     (just kidding)
10-30-2017, 06:54 AM
The Oregon State football game was so bad that I turned to the UCLA soccer game and loved it!
10-30-2017, 09:28 AM
Here are the highlights (basically, the 4 goals scored);
https://twitter.com/pac12network/status/...3436545024
BC
https://twitter.com/pac12network/status/...3436545024
BC
Here are the highlights (basically, the 4 goals scored);
https://twitter.com/pac12network/status/...3436545024
BC
https://twitter.com/pac12network/status/...3436545024
BC
10-30-2017, 10:16 AM
(10-30-2017, 09:28 AM)Boston Card link Wrote:Here are the highlights (basically, the 4 goals scored);Wow. Everyone give yourself a treat and watch that last goal. And keep in mind that she is a freshman.
https://twitter.com/pac12network/status/...3436545024
BC
(10-30-2017, 09:28 AM)Boston Card link Wrote:Here are the highlights (basically, the 4 goals scored);Wow. Everyone give yourself a treat and watch that last goal. And keep in mind that she is a freshman.
https://twitter.com/pac12network/status/...3436545024
BC
10-30-2017, 10:43 AM
Better highlight video:
https://youtu.be/0lmGWZk-E60
At least in the right order - Stanford scored first, on the header by Kiki Pickett. Then $C on the poor clearance/let down play for their goal.
The goal by Macario was just spectacular, but, as the highlight video makes clear, it was the run by Andi Sullivan that made it happen, and was IMO the single most important play of the game. Trailing 2-1, the Toejams followed my advice, and finally put on a high press starting at halftime, trapping Stanford in their own end just as UCLA did earlier in the week. The Cardinal was reduced to pounding the ball upfield on clearances under pressure, which often led to $C collecting and sending the ball right back in at the midline. Macario was trying to be a holdup player, but the Cardinal had pretty much collapsed in their own end, so she had no one to lay the ball off to.
$C had outshot Stanford 4-1 in the opening 15 minutes of the half, had generated a couple of corner kicks, and had a couple of clear players running through in the box not be able to connect on frame. So the Cardinal was definitely on the back foot, when Sullivan collected the ball just in her own half and started a long-strided dribble up the center channel, riding out one challenge, recovering, and almost getting to the area before laying the ball off to Macario just before getting clattered into by a defender. Macario's strike was amazing - over and around the wall into the near upper 90. But it was Sullivan's run that turned the game.
With a two-goal cushion, Stanford seemed to recover its balance, and the last 30 minutes was much more even - $C generated chances, but Stanford countered effectively. And for the last ten minutes, they held the defending national champions without a shot, let alone a shot on goal.
Onto C.al, and the inevitable "Let's send Santa Clara to Stanford in round 2 again" (why look, they're #32 in the RPI again - sigh) seeding by the NCAA.
VG
https://youtu.be/0lmGWZk-E60
At least in the right order - Stanford scored first, on the header by Kiki Pickett. Then $C on the poor clearance/let down play for their goal.
The goal by Macario was just spectacular, but, as the highlight video makes clear, it was the run by Andi Sullivan that made it happen, and was IMO the single most important play of the game. Trailing 2-1, the Toejams followed my advice, and finally put on a high press starting at halftime, trapping Stanford in their own end just as UCLA did earlier in the week. The Cardinal was reduced to pounding the ball upfield on clearances under pressure, which often led to $C collecting and sending the ball right back in at the midline. Macario was trying to be a holdup player, but the Cardinal had pretty much collapsed in their own end, so she had no one to lay the ball off to.
$C had outshot Stanford 4-1 in the opening 15 minutes of the half, had generated a couple of corner kicks, and had a couple of clear players running through in the box not be able to connect on frame. So the Cardinal was definitely on the back foot, when Sullivan collected the ball just in her own half and started a long-strided dribble up the center channel, riding out one challenge, recovering, and almost getting to the area before laying the ball off to Macario just before getting clattered into by a defender. Macario's strike was amazing - over and around the wall into the near upper 90. But it was Sullivan's run that turned the game.
With a two-goal cushion, Stanford seemed to recover its balance, and the last 30 minutes was much more even - $C generated chances, but Stanford countered effectively. And for the last ten minutes, they held the defending national champions without a shot, let alone a shot on goal.
Onto C.al, and the inevitable "Let's send Santa Clara to Stanford in round 2 again" (why look, they're #32 in the RPI again - sigh) seeding by the NCAA.
VG
Better highlight video:
https://youtu.be/0lmGWZk-E60
At least in the right order - Stanford scored first, on the header by Kiki Pickett. Then $C on the poor clearance/let down play for their goal.
The goal by Macario was just spectacular, but, as the highlight video makes clear, it was the run by Andi Sullivan that made it happen, and was IMO the single most important play of the game. Trailing 2-1, the Toejams followed my advice, and finally put on a high press starting at halftime, trapping Stanford in their own end just as UCLA did earlier in the week. The Cardinal was reduced to pounding the ball upfield on clearances under pressure, which often led to $C collecting and sending the ball right back in at the midline. Macario was trying to be a holdup player, but the Cardinal had pretty much collapsed in their own end, so she had no one to lay the ball off to.
$C had outshot Stanford 4-1 in the opening 15 minutes of the half, had generated a couple of corner kicks, and had a couple of clear players running through in the box not be able to connect on frame. So the Cardinal was definitely on the back foot, when Sullivan collected the ball just in her own half and started a long-strided dribble up the center channel, riding out one challenge, recovering, and almost getting to the area before laying the ball off to Macario just before getting clattered into by a defender. Macario's strike was amazing - over and around the wall into the near upper 90. But it was Sullivan's run that turned the game.
With a two-goal cushion, Stanford seemed to recover its balance, and the last 30 minutes was much more even - $C generated chances, but Stanford countered effectively. And for the last ten minutes, they held the defending national champions without a shot, let alone a shot on goal.
Onto C.al, and the inevitable "Let's send Santa Clara to Stanford in round 2 again" (why look, they're #32 in the RPI again - sigh) seeding by the NCAA.
VG
https://youtu.be/0lmGWZk-E60
At least in the right order - Stanford scored first, on the header by Kiki Pickett. Then $C on the poor clearance/let down play for their goal.
The goal by Macario was just spectacular, but, as the highlight video makes clear, it was the run by Andi Sullivan that made it happen, and was IMO the single most important play of the game. Trailing 2-1, the Toejams followed my advice, and finally put on a high press starting at halftime, trapping Stanford in their own end just as UCLA did earlier in the week. The Cardinal was reduced to pounding the ball upfield on clearances under pressure, which often led to $C collecting and sending the ball right back in at the midline. Macario was trying to be a holdup player, but the Cardinal had pretty much collapsed in their own end, so she had no one to lay the ball off to.
$C had outshot Stanford 4-1 in the opening 15 minutes of the half, had generated a couple of corner kicks, and had a couple of clear players running through in the box not be able to connect on frame. So the Cardinal was definitely on the back foot, when Sullivan collected the ball just in her own half and started a long-strided dribble up the center channel, riding out one challenge, recovering, and almost getting to the area before laying the ball off to Macario just before getting clattered into by a defender. Macario's strike was amazing - over and around the wall into the near upper 90. But it was Sullivan's run that turned the game.
With a two-goal cushion, Stanford seemed to recover its balance, and the last 30 minutes was much more even - $C generated chances, but Stanford countered effectively. And for the last ten minutes, they held the defending national champions without a shot, let alone a shot on goal.
Onto C.al, and the inevitable "Let's send Santa Clara to Stanford in round 2 again" (why look, they're #32 in the RPI again - sigh) seeding by the NCAA.
VG
10-31-2017, 02:13 PM
Also, Macario is the offensive player of the week (for the second week in a row) and Pickett was the defensive player of the week.
![[Image: DNfJ6MuVoAAKGL0.jpg]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DNfJ6MuVoAAKGL0.jpg)
Interestingly, despite winning the conference easily, we haven't had too many of our ladies be player of the week this year. Before October 17th, none of them were; we've had 5 over the last three weeks: Macario twice, Tierna Davidson as DPOW on the 17th, and Lauren Rood as goalkeeper of the week on the 17th. Surprised there hasn't been more defensive love, given our streak.
BC
Interestingly, despite winning the conference easily, we haven't had too many of our ladies be player of the week this year. Before October 17th, none of them were; we've had 5 over the last three weeks: Macario twice, Tierna Davidson as DPOW on the 17th, and Lauren Rood as goalkeeper of the week on the 17th. Surprised there hasn't been more defensive love, given our streak.
BC
Also, Macario is the offensive player of the week (for the second week in a row) and Pickett was the defensive player of the week.
Interestingly, despite winning the conference easily, we haven't had too many of our ladies be player of the week this year. Before October 17th, none of them were; we've had 5 over the last three weeks: Macario twice, Tierna Davidson as DPOW on the 17th, and Lauren Rood as goalkeeper of the week on the 17th. Surprised there hasn't been more defensive love, given our streak.
BC
Interestingly, despite winning the conference easily, we haven't had too many of our ladies be player of the week this year. Before October 17th, none of them were; we've had 5 over the last three weeks: Macario twice, Tierna Davidson as DPOW on the 17th, and Lauren Rood as goalkeeper of the week on the 17th. Surprised there hasn't been more defensive love, given our streak.
BC
10-31-2017, 06:41 PM
Sullivan has been called up to the national team and seems she will miss the first Tournament game
10-31-2017, 10:14 PM
First tournament game, not so bad. At least they're now not playing 4 team pods - so there's only one game that first weekend, and it might actually be someone from out of region. And hopefully Andi gets more PT in the first game against Canada, and a bit more rest in the second.
Before the inevitable second round lining up a matchup with Santa Clara. Again. Ad infinitum.
VG
Before the inevitable second round lining up a matchup with Santa Clara. Again. Ad infinitum.
VG
First tournament game, not so bad. At least they're now not playing 4 team pods - so there's only one game that first weekend, and it might actually be someone from out of region. And hopefully Andi gets more PT in the first game against Canada, and a bit more rest in the second.
Before the inevitable second round lining up a matchup with Santa Clara. Again. Ad infinitum.
VG
Before the inevitable second round lining up a matchup with Santa Clara. Again. Ad infinitum.
VG
11-01-2017, 12:07 AM
(10-31-2017, 10:14 PM)Viking_Guy link Wrote:First tournament game, not so bad. At least they're now not playing 4 team pods - so there's only one game that first weekend, and it might actually be someone from out of region. And hopefully Andi gets more PT in the first game against Canada, and a bit more rest in the second.
Before the inevitable second round lining up a matchup with Santa Clara. Again. Ad infinitum.
VG
Are we better prepared for Santa Clara than last year if we do meet them again? I know little about soccer or the women's collegiate soccer scene, but after following the team and looking at the records we've accomplished this year, it seems that we should be one of the favorites heading into postseason.
But then again, weren't we the #1 overall seed last year too when Santa Clara ousted us way too early?
(10-31-2017, 10:14 PM)Viking_Guy link Wrote:First tournament game, not so bad. At least they're now not playing 4 team pods - so there's only one game that first weekend, and it might actually be someone from out of region. And hopefully Andi gets more PT in the first game against Canada, and a bit more rest in the second.
Before the inevitable second round lining up a matchup with Santa Clara. Again. Ad infinitum.
VG
Are we better prepared for Santa Clara than last year if we do meet them again? I know little about soccer or the women's collegiate soccer scene, but after following the team and looking at the records we've accomplished this year, it seems that we should be one of the favorites heading into postseason.
But then again, weren't we the #1 overall seed last year too when Santa Clara ousted us way too early?
last year's loss to Santa Clara was, IMO, a combination of one of those "that's soccer" games plus a loss of composure toward the end plus the one weakness in our lineup last year. Santa Clara's strategy, facing a far superior opponent, was to bunker down in the box and prevent us from scoring any goals, hoping to either (1) steal a goal on a counterattack or (2) win in a penalty shootout. Really the best strategy they could adopt (their coach is one of the best). We played into their hands somewhat by taking lots of very long-range shots that did not go in, and we generated several close-in almost goals of which at least one usually would have gone in but didn't in this game (excellent play by GK, but you had the sense we were eventually going to score one of them). Then as we went into overtime, we became desperate and kept trying to rush to score in a hurry but this resulted in rapidly turning the ball over to Santa Clara. (This I believe was a major cause of Andi's injury, with her super-competitive spirit she tried to do it all and tore her ACL rushing over and trying to get the ball back. Then we were without our best player). (I think the desperation was unlikely to generate a goal, plus it was unnecessary in that I think our chances of winning a penalty kick shootout with Jane Campbell in goal were at least 75%). At the end of the game, our season-long weakness at one outside back position bit us; one long pass in to the forward being guarded 1 on 1 by the inexperienced player in that position who was filling in but is not actually an outside back resulted in an easy goal (not blaming that player who was being asked to play out of position with little experience at it--I don't even remember who it was).
If we play them again in the NCAAs this year, I would hope the team will benefit from learning the lessons from that game. I think it is unlikely that Santa Clara could pull it off again. What of course usually ends up happening is that, in order to save on travel expenses, the NCAA matches us up against Santa Clara when they are a better opponent than we should be playing in a low round. Last year, for example, they made it to the regional final where they lost 1-0 on the road to Georgetown.
This year, BTW, last year's hole at outside back has been filled in a big way by frosh Kiki Pickett (current Pac-12 defensive player of the week). I would bet there is not a better pair of outside backs (Pickett and McGrady) in the country. We have no holes in the starting lineup this year, although we are being forced to use Davidson in center back instead of her usual spot as a midfielder because we have no better options (fortunately she is excellent at it; our pair of center backs is one of the best in the country. As are our set of midfielders and our set of forwards!).
If we play them again in the NCAAs this year, I would hope the team will benefit from learning the lessons from that game. I think it is unlikely that Santa Clara could pull it off again. What of course usually ends up happening is that, in order to save on travel expenses, the NCAA matches us up against Santa Clara when they are a better opponent than we should be playing in a low round. Last year, for example, they made it to the regional final where they lost 1-0 on the road to Georgetown.
This year, BTW, last year's hole at outside back has been filled in a big way by frosh Kiki Pickett (current Pac-12 defensive player of the week). I would bet there is not a better pair of outside backs (Pickett and McGrady) in the country. We have no holes in the starting lineup this year, although we are being forced to use Davidson in center back instead of her usual spot as a midfielder because we have no better options (fortunately she is excellent at it; our pair of center backs is one of the best in the country. As are our set of midfielders and our set of forwards!).
last year's loss to Santa Clara was, IMO, a combination of one of those "that's soccer" games plus a loss of composure toward the end plus the one weakness in our lineup last year. Santa Clara's strategy, facing a far superior opponent, was to bunker down in the box and prevent us from scoring any goals, hoping to either (1) steal a goal on a counterattack or (2) win in a penalty shootout. Really the best strategy they could adopt (their coach is one of the best). We played into their hands somewhat by taking lots of very long-range shots that did not go in, and we generated several close-in almost goals of which at least one usually would have gone in but didn't in this game (excellent play by GK, but you had the sense we were eventually going to score one of them). Then as we went into overtime, we became desperate and kept trying to rush to score in a hurry but this resulted in rapidly turning the ball over to Santa Clara. (This I believe was a major cause of Andi's injury, with her super-competitive spirit she tried to do it all and tore her ACL rushing over and trying to get the ball back. Then we were without our best player). (I think the desperation was unlikely to generate a goal, plus it was unnecessary in that I think our chances of winning a penalty kick shootout with Jane Campbell in goal were at least 75%). At the end of the game, our season-long weakness at one outside back position bit us; one long pass in to the forward being guarded 1 on 1 by the inexperienced player in that position who was filling in but is not actually an outside back resulted in an easy goal (not blaming that player who was being asked to play out of position with little experience at it--I don't even remember who it was).
If we play them again in the NCAAs this year, I would hope the team will benefit from learning the lessons from that game. I think it is unlikely that Santa Clara could pull it off again. What of course usually ends up happening is that, in order to save on travel expenses, the NCAA matches us up against Santa Clara when they are a better opponent than we should be playing in a low round. Last year, for example, they made it to the regional final where they lost 1-0 on the road to Georgetown.
This year, BTW, last year's hole at outside back has been filled in a big way by frosh Kiki Pickett (current Pac-12 defensive player of the week). I would bet there is not a better pair of outside backs (Pickett and McGrady) in the country. We have no holes in the starting lineup this year, although we are being forced to use Davidson in center back instead of her usual spot as a midfielder because we have no better options (fortunately she is excellent at it; our pair of center backs is one of the best in the country. As are our set of midfielders and our set of forwards!).
If we play them again in the NCAAs this year, I would hope the team will benefit from learning the lessons from that game. I think it is unlikely that Santa Clara could pull it off again. What of course usually ends up happening is that, in order to save on travel expenses, the NCAA matches us up against Santa Clara when they are a better opponent than we should be playing in a low round. Last year, for example, they made it to the regional final where they lost 1-0 on the road to Georgetown.
This year, BTW, last year's hole at outside back has been filled in a big way by frosh Kiki Pickett (current Pac-12 defensive player of the week). I would bet there is not a better pair of outside backs (Pickett and McGrady) in the country. We have no holes in the starting lineup this year, although we are being forced to use Davidson in center back instead of her usual spot as a midfielder because we have no better options (fortunately she is excellent at it; our pair of center backs is one of the best in the country. As are our set of midfielders and our set of forwards!).
11-01-2017, 10:20 AM
(This post was last modified: 11-01-2017, 10:55 AM by Viking_Guy.)
OA--
Officially, the travel policy is "for security reasons" - the NCAA wants to minimize flights. I think the way it works is that they will only cover travel costs for bus transportation unless the trip is longer than 400 miles, although schools are free to pay more (was researching it looking at the men's soccer tournament, where I Google-mapped directions from Irvine (I think) to Stanford to find out if it was under the cap.
Of course, they also use it to justify regional bracketing, even if the seed lines aren't quite an S-curve (with the top seed against the lowest, and the second against second-lowest, etc.). So if Santa Clara isn't playing Stanford, it's often playing C.al. Or St. Mary's.
It works to the western teams' disadvantage because there are a limited number of teams to draw on -- back east, there's always a small-conference champion or three in easy range to pair against top-seeds. Think about UConn in women's basketball always ending up playing Quinnipiac, or Boston University, or Central Connecticut State, in a subregional at Storrs or Hartford. Or Penn State women's volleyball, playing Bucknell or Colgate in the first couple rounds of the tournament at State College.
At least now with only a single game in the first weekend, the obviousness unfairness of matching a top seed against a local team better seeded as a second or third round opponent has made the committee a little circumspect.
One other issue is that Santa Clara just know us very well - we play every year, they watch our games, and they always give us a tough match; witness the game at Buck Shaw earlier this season, 2-1 with Jahansouz having to save a penalty kick in the second half.
And to second OA's point about the effect of injury last year, this year's only loss was a direct result of McGrady getting banged up and subbed in about the 70th minute of the Florida game - both late goals for the Gators started on plays up the right side. It was also similar in that Stanford had spurned a couple of chances to make it a 3-1 lead - notably Kuhlmann being unable to put the ball on frame 1v1 with the keeper.
VG
Officially, the travel policy is "for security reasons" - the NCAA wants to minimize flights. I think the way it works is that they will only cover travel costs for bus transportation unless the trip is longer than 400 miles, although schools are free to pay more (was researching it looking at the men's soccer tournament, where I Google-mapped directions from Irvine (I think) to Stanford to find out if it was under the cap.
Of course, they also use it to justify regional bracketing, even if the seed lines aren't quite an S-curve (with the top seed against the lowest, and the second against second-lowest, etc.). So if Santa Clara isn't playing Stanford, it's often playing C.al. Or St. Mary's.
It works to the western teams' disadvantage because there are a limited number of teams to draw on -- back east, there's always a small-conference champion or three in easy range to pair against top-seeds. Think about UConn in women's basketball always ending up playing Quinnipiac, or Boston University, or Central Connecticut State, in a subregional at Storrs or Hartford. Or Penn State women's volleyball, playing Bucknell or Colgate in the first couple rounds of the tournament at State College.
At least now with only a single game in the first weekend, the obviousness unfairness of matching a top seed against a local team better seeded as a second or third round opponent has made the committee a little circumspect.
One other issue is that Santa Clara just know us very well - we play every year, they watch our games, and they always give us a tough match; witness the game at Buck Shaw earlier this season, 2-1 with Jahansouz having to save a penalty kick in the second half.
And to second OA's point about the effect of injury last year, this year's only loss was a direct result of McGrady getting banged up and subbed in about the 70th minute of the Florida game - both late goals for the Gators started on plays up the right side. It was also similar in that Stanford had spurned a couple of chances to make it a 3-1 lead - notably Kuhlmann being unable to put the ball on frame 1v1 with the keeper.
VG
(This post was last modified: 11-01-2017, 10:55 AM by Viking_Guy.)
OA--
Officially, the travel policy is "for security reasons" - the NCAA wants to minimize flights. I think the way it works is that they will only cover travel costs for bus transportation unless the trip is longer than 400 miles, although schools are free to pay more (was researching it looking at the men's soccer tournament, where I Google-mapped directions from Irvine (I think) to Stanford to find out if it was under the cap.
Of course, they also use it to justify regional bracketing, even if the seed lines aren't quite an S-curve (with the top seed against the lowest, and the second against second-lowest, etc.). So if Santa Clara isn't playing Stanford, it's often playing C.al. Or St. Mary's.
It works to the western teams' disadvantage because there are a limited number of teams to draw on -- back east, there's always a small-conference champion or three in easy range to pair against top-seeds. Think about UConn in women's basketball always ending up playing Quinnipiac, or Boston University, or Central Connecticut State, in a subregional at Storrs or Hartford. Or Penn State women's volleyball, playing Bucknell or Colgate in the first couple rounds of the tournament at State College.
At least now with only a single game in the first weekend, the obviousness unfairness of matching a top seed against a local team better seeded as a second or third round opponent has made the committee a little circumspect.
One other issue is that Santa Clara just know us very well - we play every year, they watch our games, and they always give us a tough match; witness the game at Buck Shaw earlier this season, 2-1 with Jahansouz having to save a penalty kick in the second half.
And to second OA's point about the effect of injury last year, this year's only loss was a direct result of McGrady getting banged up and subbed in about the 70th minute of the Florida game - both late goals for the Gators started on plays up the right side. It was also similar in that Stanford had spurned a couple of chances to make it a 3-1 lead - notably Kuhlmann being unable to put the ball on frame 1v1 with the keeper.
VG
Officially, the travel policy is "for security reasons" - the NCAA wants to minimize flights. I think the way it works is that they will only cover travel costs for bus transportation unless the trip is longer than 400 miles, although schools are free to pay more (was researching it looking at the men's soccer tournament, where I Google-mapped directions from Irvine (I think) to Stanford to find out if it was under the cap.
Of course, they also use it to justify regional bracketing, even if the seed lines aren't quite an S-curve (with the top seed against the lowest, and the second against second-lowest, etc.). So if Santa Clara isn't playing Stanford, it's often playing C.al. Or St. Mary's.
It works to the western teams' disadvantage because there are a limited number of teams to draw on -- back east, there's always a small-conference champion or three in easy range to pair against top-seeds. Think about UConn in women's basketball always ending up playing Quinnipiac, or Boston University, or Central Connecticut State, in a subregional at Storrs or Hartford. Or Penn State women's volleyball, playing Bucknell or Colgate in the first couple rounds of the tournament at State College.
At least now with only a single game in the first weekend, the obviousness unfairness of matching a top seed against a local team better seeded as a second or third round opponent has made the committee a little circumspect.
One other issue is that Santa Clara just know us very well - we play every year, they watch our games, and they always give us a tough match; witness the game at Buck Shaw earlier this season, 2-1 with Jahansouz having to save a penalty kick in the second half.
And to second OA's point about the effect of injury last year, this year's only loss was a direct result of McGrady getting banged up and subbed in about the 70th minute of the Florida game - both late goals for the Gators started on plays up the right side. It was also similar in that Stanford had spurned a couple of chances to make it a 3-1 lead - notably Kuhlmann being unable to put the ball on frame 1v1 with the keeper.
VG
11-01-2017, 10:35 AM
(11-01-2017, 10:20 AM)Viking_Guy link Wrote:Officially, the travel policy is "for security reasons" - the NCAA wants to minimize flights.ÂI didn't know that, but of course it is bogus. And safer to fly than to drive.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »